Tuesday, March 04, 2008

Czachorowski amicus

CAAF has granted a motion to file an amicus brief and participate in oral argument filed by Timothy Litka, a civilian military justice practitioner. United States v. Czachorowski, __ M.J. ___, No. 07-0379/NA (Feb. 29, 2008). Can anybody tell us the issue he is briefing and the interest of the amicus?

Czachorowski is an upcoming 18 March Project Outreach argument at Catholic University's Columbus School of Law. The case continues an interesting recent trend. The last Project Outreach argument -- Gallagher -- had a civilian appellate defense counsel (Bill Cassara). Czachorowski also has a civilian appellate defense counsel (Frank Spinner). And one of the two upcoming Montana Project Outreach arguments -- Bright -- also has a civilian appellate defense counsel (Charles Gittins).

3 comments:

No Man said...

Litka is a recently departed Army GAD attorney that has his own practice now, and a snazzy website (BZ to his website designer, free plug here: http://www.militaryappeal.com/home/aboutmrlitka.html). Sadly his blog is infrequently updated, last entry July 2007. Litka argued Santos, Craig, and McNutt for GAD.

Anonymous said...

Not sure what the amicus angle is. The two issues granted seem to overlap:

WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE ABUSED HIS DISCRETION BY ADMITTING INTO EVIDENCE AAC'S HEARSAY STATEMENTS IN VIOLATION OF MIL.R.EVID. 807 AND THE SIXTH AMENDMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION.

WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE ABUSED HIS DISCRETION BY ADMITTING INTO EVIDENCE AAC'S HEARSAY STATEMENTS IN VIOLATION OF THE NOTICE REQUIREMENT OF MIL.R.EVID. 807.

The CDC made several motions for an oral argument before NMCCA on these issues, which NMCCA never extended the courtesy of even addressing. NMCCA just ignored the requests for oral argument. NMCCA then released a short decision, blowing-off the raised issues. But at least they restrained themselves and didn't call them frivolous.

Anonymous said...

Litka is supervising the law student who will be arguing.